Single judge dismissed the third bail application in a murder case, holding that delay in trial cannot be the sole ground for bail owing to the gravity of the offence, relying on Supreme Court precedents.
Bail application dismissed; directed trial court to conclude trial early.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Crl. Misc. No. M-12304 of 2013 (O&M)
-: 1 :-
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Crl. Misc. No. M-12304 of 2013 (O&M) Date of decision: May 16, 2013.
Smt. Munni
... Petitioner(s)
v.
State of Haryana
... Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARAMJEET SINGH
Present: Shri Devender Sangwan, Advocate for Shri Chirag Kundu, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Paramjeet Singh, J. (Oral):
Present petition has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in a case arising out of FIR No.435, dated 24.11.2011, registered at Police Station Sadar Rohtak, under Sections 302, 120-B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
This is third bail application. First bail application was dismissed on merits by this Court vide order dated 13.8.2012. Thereafter, the second bail application was dismissed vide order dated 17.10.2012 on the ground that no change of circumstances had been cited nor had been argued. Now this is the third bail application.
Learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that the delay in trial is sufficient ground for grant of bail to the petitioner, being a lady. To substantiate his claim, learned Counsel for the petitioner has relied upon Rajwinder Kaur v. State of Punjab, 2010(3) RCR (Crl.) 495.
Crl. Misc. No. M-12304 of 2013 (O&M) -: 2 :-
I have considered the contentions of learned Counsel for the
petitioner.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Pratapbhai Hamirbhai Solanki v.
State of Gujarat and another, 2013 (1) RCR (Crl.) 592 observed as follows:- “ 19. We are absolutely conscious that liberty is a greatly cherished value in the life of an individual, and no one would like to barter it for all the tea in China, but it is obligatory on the part of court to scan and scrutinize, though briefly, as regards the prima facie case, the seriousness and gravity of the crime and the potentiality of the accused to tamper with the evidence apart from other aspects before the restriction on liberty is lifted on imposition of certain conditions. ”
The principles laid down in aforesaid judgments make it abundantly clear that the court has to consider the seriousness and gravity of the offence for grant of bail, therefore, delay in trial cannot be the sole ground for grant of bail in each and every case.
In view of this, there is no merit in the petition.
Dismissed.
However, the trial court shall make an endeavour that the trial
is concluded as early as possible.
May 16, 2013. kadyan
[ Paramjeet Singh ] Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether delay in trial alone is sufficient ground for grant of regular bail in a murder case.
Whether the prima facie case and gravity of the offence require scrutiny for bail even in delayed trials.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Rajwinder Kaur v. State of PunjabReferred¶15
Rajwinder Kaur v. State of Punjab, 2010(3) RCR (Crl.) 495
Pratapbhai Hamirbhai Solanki v. State of Gujarat and anotherExplained¶19
Pratapbhai Hamirbhai Solanki v. State of Gujarat and another, 2013 (1) RCR (Crl.) 592
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Smt. Munni
State of Haryana
Paramjeet Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
